You can bet those federal agents where working in the interests of the ranchers and the fears of the locals.

The characteristics of any restored local population will eventually match it's environment. That's the way nature works. To complain that dna restoration isn't perfect is silly. The environment is not the same as it was either.

Quite correct Mono, the fear of ranchers, farmers , cattle and horse folks , poultry and pig farmers alike- that WAS the population back then. Indians hunted wolves. Everyone back then shot one on sight normally. Now that its more crowded than then, you cant expect to re-intro natural numbers into un- natural space and not expect un- natural results. Especially considering the over populations of other A type predators like mtn lions in states like Cali-protected there- which actually push more into Nevada theses days.

I seriously doubt that hunting delisted wolves will have much of an impact on the population numbers. The fukkers are SNEAKY and are seldom seen in the open. There could be a 25 wolf per hunter limit, and I'd be willing to bet that very few hunters would even see a wolf to shoot, much less manage to bag one. Most of the predator-designated wolves have been shot from helicopters in response to local complaints.

I have seen seen five different maps of Gray Wolf subspecies distribution (and posted at least three on ST) They don't agree 100%...but all show the mass preponderance of upper U.S. Rocky Mountains arrayed in theCanis Lupus Nubilus zone.

The environment is so different now, who can say what should be natural today. Let nature sort it out.

Yes, nature will sort it out. Sorting it by reducing some elk populations in central ID by 85% since occidentalis was introduced...I mean "restored"...and sorting by completely decimating the moose population in Targhee Creek, near my cabin..

I'm afraid human nature is going to be be a major factor in the sorting,now. Not that I welcome hearing guns ...

Speaking of Elk populations, they truly need wolves in Estes park! That place is a disaster!

So, to rephrase the question I asked up thread, why are certain topics qaraunteed, hot button topics? You can troll more responses than you can deal with by mentioning, religion, republicans, Democrats, any current politician, guns, trad climbing, rap bolting, veganism etc, in a thread title. We are used to that.

But why do some topics, like wolves, that have almost nothing to do with 90% of the population make that list?
Wolves basicly affect almost no one. But everyone feels the need to have an opinion. Yeah they piss off people trying to raise sheep and cows in appropriate locations. Big deal! They do not do the damage to human populations that mtn lions, dogs, or anything with rabies does, yet they garner an inordinate emotional response. Why is that?

Jaybro...To answer your question..Maybe environmentalism is the line in the sand and having more wolves is a step in the right direction but on the other hand if they are impacting ranchers livestock and having an adverse effect on other wildlife...?